(1) Field of the Invention
The invention generally relates to means and methods of producing web search results upon a physical display. More particularly, embodiments of the invention relate to the artful presentation of web search results by use of display properties akin to planetary physics.
(2) The Related Art
Search display systems are known in the related art and typically provide linear lists of found websites or search results. Results deemed most relevant to a search are presented on top of a list and less relevant results are presented in descending order upon pages and pages of an ordered list. Other than list placement position, each presented search result looks similar to the next.
The related art fails to display the attributes of links pointing to a found site, other sites linking to the found site, or other qualitative attributes. The related art, with its textual list form of results, suffers from practical limitations as to the number of search results that can be meaningfully displayed.
The descending nature of textual results in the related art fails to disclose how individual results relate to one another on a variety of metrics. From a practical standpoint, the related art's text based result listings make low ranking results virtually invisible to typical users. Moreover, results with virtually identical characteristics necessarily must be ranked in sequential order, implying greater relative importance of higher ranked results than reflected in the underlying website characteristics. Textual results in the related art are shown in an ordinal ranked order, with no indication of matters of degree. A result that is listed in the fourth position, for example, may be only slightly more highly ranked than the next result in the fifth position. On the other hand, the result in the fourth position may be much more important than the result listed in the fifth position. Because an ordinal ranking scale is used in the textual display of results in the related art, these two unique scenarios would be displayed in the same depiction in the related art, thus masking potentially useful information about the relative importance of the fourth and fifth results. As another example, the first three results may be extremely important according to the given ranking methodology, with all other results much less important. In the textual results in the related art, this importance of the top three, and the relative unimportance of the next ninety seven, for example, is lost, with the user simply seeing textual, ordinal lists of results, completely unaware of the disparity in importance among results. In the present invention, the scenario described above would be depicted by displaying three large result icons near the center of the result map, and the remaining results appearing further away and as much smaller result icons, making it very easy for the user to see the similarity in ranking importance among the first three results, as well as the disparity in relative importance of the first three results versus the remaining results. As another example, one hundred results might be almost equally ranked. This hypothetical result list might look, in the textual results in the related art, no different from the result group wherein the top three are much more highly ranked, with an ordered list of one hundred results, with no indication that the first result is essentially no more highly ranked than the result listed in the hundredth position. Users, from a practical standpoint, would be unlikely to see any results beyond those listed in the first few pages of results, despite the relative equal importance of these unseen results. In the present invention, this scenario would be depicted by displaying one hundred similarly sized icons at similar distances from the result map center, making it very easy for the user to see that all the one hundred results are of similar importance according to the given ranking algorithm. In the present invention, matters of degree of ranking are visible to the user, who sees the size and relative positioning of each result as a reflection of relative importance according to the given ranking algorithm.
The one dimensional, ordinal ranking of search results of the prior art has become antiquated and fails to capitalize upon new forms of user interfaces, such as touch screen devices now found in phones, tables, laptops and even desktop computer environments. Search results of the prior art were designed to be viewed one page at a time and fail to contemplate the use of zoom, panning, pinch and other commands now used with touch screen technology.
The textual results of the prior art fail to reveal the reasoning of why a result is shown at a certain linear rank. In the prior art, a user cannot ascertain ranking methodology and does not know if a rank was achieved by a result having many low-value links or a few high-value links (or other attribute or attributes upon which the ranking algorithm is based).
Prior art textual results fail to disclose the trending or recent rank changes of a search result. For example, the prior art fails to show if a result has recently gained new links, has aging links, recent “likes” or +1 votes or other changing attributes not contemplated in the prior art. The prior art fails to allow a user to rewind displayed search results to ascertain which results have gained rank and which results have lost rank.
The prior art textual search result presentations eschew any display of link attributes. Thus, the prior art fails to show how one result is connected to another or the type or number of links coming or going from a result.
While there are several patents and patent applications addressing the display of search results, the shortcomings of the prior art discussed above remain unsolved.
U.S. Pat. No. 7,624,101 by Lin et al issued on Nov. 24, 2009 discloses a method of presenting phone numbers and map locations related to displayed search results.
U.S. Patent Publication 2005/0060287 by Hellman et al, published on Mar. 17, 2005 discloses a graph-theoretic structural analysis for creating clustered nodes and arrows to display search results. Hellman teaches the use of clusters, sub-clusters and nodes to allow a user to narrow search results by selecting from a series of presented clusters. Hellman discloses a “do it yourself” search display method requiring users to find data themselves. While Hellman presents interesting graph theory concepts, Hellman fails to address the prior art shortfalls of web search display.
U.S. Patent Publication 2008/0082578 by Hogue et al, published on Apr. 3, 2008 discloses a method of displaying time lines of events relevant to displayed search results. For example, in Houge if a search result was of a person, a timeline of events in the person's life might be displayed. But, Houge fails to consider the need to see prior search rankings or attributes of a displayed site.
U.S. Patent Publication 2008/0208819 by Wang et al, published on Aug. 28, 2008 discloses a graphical user interface based web search system and alludes to a Cartesian coordinate mapping system. But, Wang teaches away from the presentation of results disclosed herein and teaches refinements in eliciting a series of user inputs to more carefully define and develop a search string. Wang teaches the use of tags and search algorithms to ascertain the true search intentions of a user. Wang fails to improve upon the actual presentation of search results.
U.S. Patent Publication 2010/0125573 A1 by Venolia, published on May 20, 2010 discloses the presentation of hyperlinks in a search result list and does use graphs to chart web pages and hyperlinks. But, Venolia teaches the use of ordered lists in displaying search results. The ordered lists of Venolia do add various symbols to denote links between displayed results. The methodology of Venolia is limited to the use of ordered lists.
U.S. Patent Publication 2009/0228785 by Creekbaum et al, published on Sep. 10, 2009 discloses a software application for displaying data from a web service in a visual map. Creekbaum teaches the use of a user interface allowing users to create their own unique visual maps of objects upon a computer screen and then have the objects populated by use of specific web searches. Creekbaum is well suited toward users who want to create their own interesting presentations of information; however, Creekbaum fails to address the display of web search results in reaction to the typical consumer's normal search input.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,457,004 by Nishioka et al, issued on Sep. 24, 2002 discloses a topic word graph interface allowing users to find documents by selecting through topic words and following graphs. Nishioka presents an interesting interface facilitating an efficient search for information. But, Nishioka fails to address the presentation searches.
U.S. Pat. No. 7,921,379 by Ko, issued on Apr. 5, 2011 graphically displays further search categories in reaction to a user search. The two dimensional display system of Ko presents sub-categories or categories related to a user input. Additional search categories are presented until a user finds the desired subject. Ko acts as a graphical decision tree in assisting a user in deriving a search string. Ko uses two dimensional graphs to show the relative number of links mapping presented categories or sub-categories.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,810,402 by Bates et al, issued on Oct. 26, 2004 discloses means and methods of color coding search results. Bates colors words of search results, and presents search results in the ordinal form of the prior art.